tv FOX News Sunday With Chris Wallace FOX News October 19, 2014 11:00pm-12:01am PDT
my doctor told me the only way you're catching ebola on an airplane is if you join the mile-high club with an ebola patient on the airplane. at 4:0t what you need to know about ebola. we continue our special coverage tonight at 10 p.m. i'm chris wallace. president obama names an ebola czar but there are growing demands in congress for a travel ban from west africa. >> our fundamental mission is to protect americans. right now we're able to track everyone who comes in. >> but you're not stopping them from being around other people, doctor? >> we'll get the latest from the head of allergy and internal diseases, dr. fauci. we'll talk with chair of the oversight panel, tim murphy and infeshz disease special, michael
osterholm. if we do these protocols properly, the widespread of ebola in this country are very, very low. >> our sunday panel weighs in. then it's just 16 days till the midterm election with control of the senate still up for grabs. we'll have a debate between the chairs of both parties in their first joint appearance of 2014. it's a "fox news sunday" exclusive. our power player of the week, the man who keeps america on time. all right now on "fox news sunday." >> hello again from fox news in washington. under fire from republicans and some democrats, president obama is now scrambling to restore confidence in how his administration is handling the ebola threat.
today we want to take a look at it from all angles. we'll talk with the government's point man on infectious disease, dr. anthony fauci and hear from two critics, congressman tim murphy and health expert dr dr. osterholm. we begin with john from atlanta. >> chris, good morning to you. this is the day the quarantine is scheduled to be lifted on family members of thomas eric duncan. he's the first person to die from ebola virus disease in this country. today marks 21 days since he was first admitted to the hospital. that hospital, texas presbyterian is admitting more mistakes today. in an open letter it apologized its training and education programs for employees had not been fully employed before duncan walked into that hospital. they are pushing back for more information in the duncan medical records saying there were lapses. that is when nurses nina pham
and amber vinson are believed to have been fin ekted, both being treated at emory and nih. judge clay jenkins worries more of the health care workers currently being monitored will be at risk. >> we're prayerful we won't have more but i have my team making contingencies to cover double digit mnumbers. >> he's saying 50 health care workers may be infected. cdc raising the standards for personal protective equipment in new guidelines it will release. it's believed they'll have head-to-toe covering. many people are concerned public health officials were woefully
unprepared and making it up as they go along. the lab worker who was out on carnival cruise landed in galveston. public health officials say she poses no threat. >> now, let's bring in one of the government's top public health officials leading the fight against ebola. dr. anthony fauci, director of national infectious diseases. welcome to "fox news sunday". >> good to be with you. >> let's start with nina pham who was flown from dallas to nih after getting the ebola virus. she was listed in fair condition on friday. how is she now? >> she's fine. she's fair. very stable. comfortable. when you get ebola, it really knocks you out, chris. obviously, there's a lot of fatigue and weakness, but she's doing quite well. had a long conversation with her last night. she's in good spirits. >> you optimistic she's going to make it? >> you know, you always predict when you have a very serious
disease like this, but i'm feeling good about the fact that she's progressing very well. >> now, there is a report that she -- she was one of the first people to treat thomas eric duncan, patient zero, in dallas, and the report is she was not wearing protective gear originally. one, is that true? two, does she think -- does she have an idea as to how she got the virus? >> well, the answer is that the protocol that was originally recommended was a protocol that's a w.h.o. protocol that is best fitted for out in the field. it doesn't cover every single aspect of your skin. and that worked in the field. what's very clear now, when you're in an intensive care setting, doing things you would never do in the bush in africa, very invasive type procedures, that is not the optimal way. we don't know for sure, but it is likely she got infected because not completely covered. >> president obama has named a
lawyer, ron klain, to be the ebola czar. as head of infectious disease at nih, how will you coordinate with the new ebola czar? >> well, we have coordination from the white house now with lisa monaco and susan rice. so, we have multiple agencies involved. one of them is hhs. right now what we're going to have with ron is we'll have somebody whose full-time job is doing that. we welcome that, because as we know, susan and lisa have very important day jobs they need to deal with. we're looking forward to work with him as a coordinator on what we do. >> one of the criticisms of the government response so far is that officials, top officials, have said things that turned out afterwards not to be true. take a look at these. >> i have no doubt that we'll stop this in its tracks in the u.s. >> every hospital in the country has the capability to isolate a patient. >> i shook hands with, hugged
and kissed, not the doctors but a couple of the nurses, and i felt perfectly safe doing so. >> doctor, how do you explain all of these misstatements or overstatements from top government officials? >> well, i'm not so sure, chris, they're misstatements and overstatements. when dr. frieden said, we can stop this in its tracks, he was talking about an outbreak. and what was applied to that was the fact -- >> well, three people. two more people got it. >> no, two more people. two more people were infected in a situation in which they were at risk. what dr. frieden was talking about was an outbreak in the public. now, we certainly are not happy at all those two nurses were in danger and actually got infected. but that is strictly not an outbreak. >> october 3rd lisa monaco says, every hospital in the country can isolate a patient. i mean, look, without relitigating each statement, clearly there was a sense of
certainty that was conveyed which has not been lived up to. >> right, right, exactly. that's unfortunate. what we need to do right now is make sure when we talk about things, that we talk about them -- there aren't absolutes. you want to have a delicate balance between assuring the american people but not scaring them with the fact that there may be a risk. so, what we do right now is nothing is completely risk-free. that's what people need to understand. the relative risk of things, people need to understand, is very, very small. never zero, chris. never zero, but very small. >> when you were here just two weeks ago, you flatly opposed a travel ban from the three west african countries, the hot zone up there on the map, but now more than two dozen african countries have restricted travel from those countries. so, have a number of european airlines. are we here in the u.s. being just politically correct at allowing people to travel in? >> i don't think so, chris.
i think when you talk about the idea of a travel ban, we listen to and respect the opinions of people who feel that could be the -- that should be the case, because their argument, it's an argument from people who are of good intention. they want to do the best for the american people. there are some downsides to that. >> what's the strongest argument against a travel ban? >> the strongest argument against it, when people are coming into the country, you know exactly, you can track them. if you say, nobody comes from sierra leone, liberia or guinea, there are so many other ways to get into the country. can you go from one of the other countries and then get back in. so, when they come in from a place you can track them, you know. >> just briefly. i mean, they're going to have a passport from that country. they're going to have a stamp from that country. >> right. >> couldn't you still screen them? i mean, you know, and i hear this talk about, well, we'll disrupt the democracy, the xhis of this country. we're talking about 100 to 150 people each day. is that going to cause that much disruption to do what a lot of
countries in africa are now doing? >> but, take it from the other side, chris. if you look at the august and september, 36,000 people came to an airport in one of those three countries to get out. by the screening there, 77 were not allowed to get on the plane for health reasons. of those 77, none had ebola. so, there is not a big influx of people trying to get into the country. so, you got to look at what the possible downsides of just trying to completely not let anybody out when there is, not only not a large number, zero of the 77 actually stopped had ebola. most had ma layer ra. >> thank you for coming in away from your busy schedule. >> good to be with you. >> so, has the government done enough to stop the spread of ebola? joining us republican congressman tim murphy, chair of the oversight panel that held a hearing that criticized the obama administration.
and dr. osterholm from university of minnesota. congressman murphy, your initial reaction to ron klain as the ebola czar was, quote, it was shocking and tone deaf. have you heard anything since then to change your mind, snir. >> no. the american people are looking for someone with some knowledge and expertise. he has none in these fields. and i -- and throughout this whole thing, given the number of missteps and promises and reassurances the cdc has given from we have plenty of hospitals, the gowning was fine the way it was initially -- fever can identify someone, you only use 100.4. so many of those reassurances have not been accurate. what the people want is as much facts as possible. don't overpromise. don't be certain when you're not certain. but the key is to protect and defend the people of the united states. the way the cdc is coming out now and saying things like, well, you know, so far no one has come in, well, this is like
dealing with terrorism. we have to be right 100% of the time and ebola only has to get in once. that's what's happened so far. i don't think these false assurances are working. my background is not medicine. it's psychology. i know what creates panic. what creates panic is when people are given given information that proves false. we need to stop these overcertainties from medical folks and i'm not sure a czar with no background can help with that. >> mr. osterholm, you heard my conversation with dr. fauci. you say, one of the problems is we've been too confident, too certain in what we've been telling -- what the government has been telling the american people. >> well, first of all, we do know a lot about ebola. and i agree wholeheartedly. we will not have a communitywide outbreak in this country. we didn't get it right in dallas, as we could have and should have. frankly, if it happened in a lot of other communities we probably wouldn't have gotten it right
either. we've learned a lot in the past two weeks. we need to focus on and keep our eye on the ball is not this country. while i'm concerned about what happens in this country, what i'm really concerned about is what happens in africa. as long as that infectious disease forest firs keeps burning, those embers will continue around the world whether we close borders are not on. >> i want to talk about the threats from the hot zone to this country. one of the big issues is this idea of the travel ban. i want to talk to congressman murphy about it. the idea of a travel ban from those three countries to the united states. congressman murphy, this is what president obama said this week. >>. >> trying to seal off an entire region of the world, if that were even possible, can actually make the situation worse. >> congressman murphy, why is the president wrong? >> well, look, first of all, the president has sealed off israel in the past. we've sealed off other areas temporarily. we can have travel restrictions until we get the rest right.
and the rest is not right. the assumptions they have, for example, that it will lead to some collapse of this economy in africa, i don't agree with. the idea we can't get in supplies. that's totally false. we shipped tons of thousands, hundreds of supplies into germany during the berlin air lift. the fact people won't travel is absurd. people are moving and migrating all over africa now for jobs and temporary work. they do that now. we can trace passports, we can look at things. this idea of only using fever scans and asking people to be honest, we know those are two more assumptions the cdc has that are not true. and if you're going to restore faith in the american people and stop panic, you've got to be more accurate here. >> well, let me bring in mr mr. osterholm. as i discussed with dr. fauci, the fact is that a number -- i think two dozen african nations have restricted travel from the so-called hot zone, which raises the question, should we?
>> well, first of all, let's be clear. just because somebody takes an action doesn't mean it's right. i believe congressman murphy is well-intentioned in his assessment. but we've looked at this issue quite closely over the years. you've led this program by saying i'm critical of our response. i have been. i would have no problem saying that the thing to do is close the border if we could really protect this country from what's happening over there. that's just not the case. this is not a partisan issue. it shouldn't be a partisan issue. just this past week, former secretary mike leavitt of hhs under the bush administration, somebody i very much respect and admire himself came out and said from his own experience having been at hhs and viewing all the information -- >> but why is a travel been a bad idea? >> well, the travel ban is a bad idea, in part, because of the fact we really don't effectively stop people from getting into this country. and for what? i mean, what i'm talking about here is we've had one single
case so far in the big picture of what the situation is. maybe we stop another one, two more. but we do know that travel bans will seriously impact our ability to get people in and out of that area. congressman, with all due respect, i agree with you on the berlin air lift, but that was all military. if you're prepared today to give us hundreds of military planes that will fly in and out at will when we need them to move not only material but also people, when we move them around, then i'll say, well, maybe we ought to reconsider this. i don't see anybody in congress telling us today we'll get hundreds of military planes. >> congressman murphy? >> well, i've already asked dr. frieden and sent a letter to president obama saying, tell us whatever congress needs to authorize. we're sending thousands of troops over there through ships, through also planes. we could do a lot here. the ability of the u.s. military to move goods and supplies is pretty massive. we all want to stop ebola in africa, but we also don't want it to come here. if people talk about, you know, one more case. it means a lot to the family of
someone who dies in the united states and means something to the safe and security of americans. let's concentrate on stopping it in africa and also make sure we're protecting america's borders from it coming here, foo. >> finally, mr. osterholm, you say this is a mayor than, not a sprint. we're barely at the one mile mark in our fight against ebola. you understand that in africa. but you also say it's going to get a lot worse before it gets better. are you saying that about the u.s., too? >> well, as long as this forest fire is burning in africa potentially spreads eastward into some of the larger, other cities in africa, yeah, we'll see skid marks flying off. do i believe we'll handle it right in the united states? we'll protect health care workers, yes, i do. what i think we're not talking about is the devastation this is causing in africa. not just in human lives but actually from a security standpoint. might, just by astward as we people walking on foot, not being checked at borders or not
getting on airplanes, the potential that this has to destabilize all of africa is huge. ask anyone in the intelligence community what that means in potential safe havens for terrorists, et cetera. we need to do more. congress marngs i would love to have you look at, why are we not seeing more troops on the ground? why are our supplies not arriving in these countries? why is the rest of the world not responding? that's what we need to keep our eye on. and we need a vaccine. congressman, i hope you'll help us get that vaccine because that's the only magic bullet and that rests largely in the hands of united states. >> thank you both for coming in today and shedding more light on this subject. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> does the president's appointment of an ebola czar mark a turning point in the administration's response? our sunday group joins the conversation. mrugs, what would you like to ask the panel? go to facebook or twitt twitter @foxnewssunday and we
fighting this skis will take time. before it's over we may see isolated cases here in america. but we know how to wage this fight. >> president obama on saturday trying to reassure americans who may not be all that confident in the government's response to the ebola threat. and it's time now for our sunday group. brit hume, vera tandon, syndicated columnist george will and fox news political analyst juan williams. i want to start with the lead story in "the new york times" on saturday. put this headline up, if you will. the headline, amid assurances on
ebola, obama is said to seethe. i haven't seen the word seethe this a headline in a long time. it goes on to say the president is just as upset with the administration's response as all of us. do you buy it? >> no. the story -- i felt bad for the administration and i felt worse for "the new york times" when i read the story. i diplomat buy dn't buy it at a. this is the president's aides, most anonymous, as portraying him as having -- >> seething. >> seething. no, i didn't believe it. and i think the appointment of ron klain shows you the administration thinks this is more of a political and public relations problem than it is a public health problem. it is clearly both. the key to the whole thing, chris, in my view, klain was not given the kind of authority, in other words, reporting directly to the president, and taking overall charge of this effort as
someone who is a true czar would. he's still reporting to people that have been managing this problem already. >> i want to go bigger than ron klain. as head of a think tank with close ties to the white house, how do you explain all of the screw-ups in the government response to the ebola situation here in the u.s. so far? >> well, look, i think it's clear that cdc was -- gave, you know, some inaccurate protocol information right at the beginning of this. they even said so on thursday in the "new york times," that the protocol should have been closer to doctors without borders. i do think the administration is taking the right steps, the cdc s.w.a.t. team going in wherever there is a patient immediately. that's an important step. the steps they are taking now are really critical. i think -- >> not to relitigate, but we played this for dr. fauci, frieden saying, we can stop this in its tracks. lisa monaco saying, every hospital in the country knows how to isolate. president obama talking about,
i'm hugging nurses. i mean, there was a statement of -- there was an overstatement, an overcertainty that just really, i think, has hurt the government's credibility. >> look, i think actually dr dr. fauci answered these things very well. it's important dr. fauci is out because these are public health issues. the challenge, as he said very clearly, look, we have three cases so far. 300 million people. three cases. we don't want to institute panic in the country. we now see instances of some overreaction in the public. we want to get to these cases. there should have been cdc s.w.a.t. teams every single location. >> would you have felt good if you were on that plane with the woman told by the cdc to fly when it turned out she had ebola? >> i wouldn't feel great about it, but on the other hand i don't think it's right right now for the media to instill a level of panic in the country that can lead to counterproductive results. we want people who are sick to come forward. this is a public health issue. it shouldn't be a political crisis. it is a public health issue.
>> fair enough. george, we spoke yesterday and you said you wanted to focus on some comments that tom frieden, the head of cdc, made. this was about a video president obama sent to the hot zone in which he said, you can get on a bus and you don't have to worry about catching ebola. frieden was asked about that. here's what he had to say. >> if you're a member of the traveling public and are healthy, should you be worried you might have gotten it by sitting next to someone? the answer is, no. second, if you are sick and you may have ebola, should you get on a bus? the answer to that is also no. you might become ill. you might have a problem that exposes someone around you. >> george, you say that's the sflob. >> well, that is the problem. don't if you -- if you're now feeling health y you're going to go on feeling healthy because you can't get ebola sitting next to someone. but if you have flu-like symptoms or ebola-like symptoms, don't get on the bus because you
might expose someone. you can't square that circle. the problem is the original assumption was, said can great certitude if not certainty, was that you need to have direct characters meaning with bodily fluids from someone, because it's not airborne. there are now doctors who are saying, we're not sure it can't be in some senses transmitted by airborne. >> i'm not sure that's true. >> where are you getting the doctors who are saying it's not airborne? we've had cdc, we've had the world health organization, doctors have been treating this for 40 years. it's not just like ebola just started. where are the doctor -- you had dr. osterhohm here, too, critical of some elements of this but he's also saying, there are brafk facts around this. >> among the basic facts are those who said it's not air boerngs you must however, understand they said that the fluids can be infectious for up to a number of days. >> yes, but have you to have interaction with the fluid. >> on a dry surface, hence they said, well, when you get on an
airplane, perhaps you should clean the armrest next to you and the tray. doctors are saying in a sneeze, a cough, some of the airborne particles can be infectious. >> i'm sorry, who are the doctors saying -- i mean, this is what i think is really important. that facts about this disease do not lead to panic. so far, every expert that i've seen have said that -- >> every expert that you've seen. here we go again -- >> well -- >> here we go again. >> cdc. >> -- everyone agrees -- >> i do want to say this in the interest that there is no indication so far that it is airborne. that, yes, if there's fluid and you're a couple of feet away, it can have an impact. but it isn't that you can just breathe the air. >> but isn't that airborne sdm. >> well, no. it's contact with a fluid. it's different than the flu. it's different than the flu. >> yes. >> we do want to stay with what we know and we don't know anything to contradict that. let me quickly go to you in the time we have remaining, juan,
because we asked you questions for the panel and we got a number like this from clay dalton who writes, a lawyer with zero medical experience -- he's reacting to ron klain -- as usual have i no confidence in the government. juan, how do you answer clay? what about this argument that this is not the -- the appointment of ron klain does not instill more public confidence when our public health experts have said a lot of things that have turned out not to be true? >> i don't think there's any question with networks are running around with chicken little -- >> it's all our fault? czink the media has been terrible. let me go beyond that saying congress had hearings. the political curtain has gone up on this theater. and i think ron klain is part of it. i think it's a political response. did not please me. i thought we needed somebody with more expertise on the
specific issue. but the whois said this is management, he needs to coordinate, implement, make sure everybody has the right splice, not only in the united states, but africa, the military. that's important to me. now you're seeing politics and bringing it to the forefront. they're using it to undercut the president. republicans are saying he's incompetent. to me it's all politics. it's disconcerting when you say it's a human situation. there's going to be human error. we're trying to deal with it. honestly, america is the only country doing anything. the europeans, the africans aren't doing anything and yet people are like, chicken little, sky is falling. it's craziness. it's sad. >> all right. panel, we have to take a break here. we'll see you a little later in the program. when we come back, we're now entering the home stretch in the midterm election quam pacampaig. the chairs of the republican and
there are now just 16 days till this year's midterm election where we could see a big shift in the balance of power here in washington. joining us now for their first joint appearance of 2014, the chair of the republican national committee, lance prebuis and debbie wasserman schultz. let's talk about the big question. will republicans take the senate? as you know, a bunch of these election labs out there. nate silver's fivethirtyeight website says the gop has a 62% chance of taking the senate. the new york time's upshot says a 70% chance.
"the washington post" election lab says it's a 93% likelihood. chairman, will your party take the senate? >> absolutely. we feel really good about our chances of taking the senate. it's partly because, number one, the president's taking the country in the wrong direction. the lieutenants have followed the president off the plank. there's a malaise across the country that people are not confident in the job the democrats have done. we'll win on the issues and we're also winning on the ground. the democratic advantage in iowa is all but evaporating. no other senate state on the ground are we losing. we're doing what we need to do to win. but it's more important we get our country turned around again. >> congresswoman, are you going to lose the senate? >> no, we're going to hold the senate. over the next couple weeks and leading up to even today, the one question that voters are going to ask themselves, chris, is who has my back?
and on issue after issue, democrats have stood up for jobs, for the economy, for investing in education and health care. those are the issues voters are talking about. and the republicans have engaged in trying to take their health care away. to oppose the minimum wage. i just want to address what rience just said about the ground game. could anyone have managed two days before election day the republicans would have to invest in south dakota, kansas and georgia. blood red states that they are now worried they might lose. >> you guys are losing everywhere. first of all, the president hasn't had anybody's back. he hasn't even had your back. i don't know whose back these democrats have. but it's not the american people's backs. >> let me interrupt for a minute because i want to talk about that. because i think you would both agree that, perhaps, the republicans' best issue is the unpopularity of this president. look at some interesting numbers here. in these four critical states,
with key senate races, mr. obama's approval rating is in the 30s and all four democratic incumbents running for re-election in those states have voted with the president more than 90% of the time. here is how tom cotton is going after senator pryor in arkansas. >> senator pryor has voted with barack obama 93% of the time. he cast deciding vote for obamacare and he rubber stamps barack obama's foreign policy of weakness and retreat. >> congresswoman, not to get specifically into arkansas, but isn't the problem -- isn't the president a real problem for these democratic senators? >> no. and, chris, from that same fox news poll, americans indicated they want democrats to maintain control of congress. democrats have a higher approval rating than republicans do in fox's own poll. >> but the president's approval rating is in the 30s in all those states. >> the president isn't on the ballot here. republicans are desperate to put him on the ballot because
they're trying to run away from their own terrible record. mitch mcconnell -- >> the president. >> chris, micconnell is trying o make this about anything other than his own record. he slg to shut down the government. he's willing to do it again. that's what we can expect -- >> the democrats are trying to walk a very difficult balance. debbie has a tough job. what's happening are the democrats running, number one, they don't want to be aligned with the president. obviously, you can't be with him with his numbers in the tank the way they are. but they also have to defend the fact they supported the president 95% of the time. smars mitch mcconnell, the democrats have left kentucky. they left alison grimes high and dry. we're winning everywhere. not because things in the country are going well. >> i know we could debate any one of these issues on and on. one of the democrats' best
issues is women and what they call the war on women by republicans. congresswoman, you have hit that issue hard. let's take a look. >> scott walker has given women the back of his hands. and there is no -- i know that is stark. i know that is direct. but that is reality. >> you later said that was a bad choice of words. you're not way from the argument that democrats are helping women and republicans are launching a war on women? >> let's take a look at scott walker's record. >> let's not -- >> this is a guy who signed -- signed the bill -- >> i know. but what's the bigger issue? >> taking away enforcing equal pay for equal work. scott walker's record is extremely important. this is the governor of rience's own state who said he would create 200,000 jobs. that's a broken promise. wisconsin actually lost 4300 jobs. when it comes to issues important to women like increasing women wage, enforcing
equal pay for equal work, making sure you can make your own reproductive choices and -- >> let me ask you -- >> republicans are wrong -- >> -- whether it's fair pay or some aspects of obamacare, don't women have legitimate concerns about republican policy? >> not if you look at the latest polls. the story out this morning in politico -- >> let mhim finish. >> barack obama is losing women in battleground states today. if you read the denver post and "union leader," the democrats are beclowning themselves on this issue. in fact, when debbie went to wisconsin to say to the world that, you know, scott walker is giving the back of his hands to women, she had to come back and apologize because then the next day "the wall street journal" took debbie to task for her words and actually defended scott walker. the fact is, this issue is backfiring -- >> congresswoman -- >> -- on the democrats and we're actually --
>> go ahead. >> chris, on issue after issue. i remember rience in the autopsy done by -- >> he's still alive. he did an autopsy after the 2012 defeat. >> exactly. where he said that it wasn't the principles of the republican party that was the problem. it was that they needed to speak more nicely to groups like women and african-americans and hispanic-americans. >> okay. >> just one second. a couple weeks ago rience did another speech about republican principles and continued -- >> this is like a card trick -- >> i want to move on. >> -- in race after race -- >> we have a minute of time. >> third card trick. >> in race after race, democrats are -- >> winning over women in colorado. >> guys, ebola has now become a big political issue, as we saw in the debate, in the iowa senate race this week. here, you can take a look. republican state senator joni ernst with a slight lead over
democratic congressman bruce braley. here's what they talked about in the debate. >> if that means putting travel bans on and it protects the american people, we need to consider doing that. if it means beefing up travel restrictions, we need to do that. >> unfortunately, our administration, including congressman braley, has been very reactive rather than proactive. >> chairman preibus, democrats say your party has cut funding for national institutes of health and research on infectious diseases. >> actually, funding to cdc has actually gone up over the last several years. the last person to actually infuse the cdc with a lot more cash than this president has have been george w. bush. so, the fact -- >> is ebola a fair political issue? >> well, i think that we should try to refrain from making it a political issue. but i think the problem you have is that americans, like so many other issues that the president is touching right now, have lost competence in this president's ability to lead. there is a -- there is a malaise
in this country of how people are feeling that this president is handling big problems. and when you appoint this next individual, klain, who is a lobbyist and a political hack to head up the ebola crisis in this country, it doesn't give americans any confidence in this president. >> congresswoman. >> she's going to defend it now. which is going to make it worse for the democrats. >> when you have republican senators like rand paul, who's a doctor, who should know better, saying you can be three feet from someone who has ebola and actually get it. i mean, that's an example of how republicans are politicizing this. ron johnson -- >> how close -- >> wait a minute. you're politicizing it, too. you're talking about all the cuts -- >> no. >> incidentally, "the washington post" gave four pinocchios to, which is the biggest whopper. >> i have not said that. >> have the democrats said that? i'm talking about -- you're chairmanwoman of this party. >> as a chairwoman of this party, i'm saying this is an
issue that should not be politicized. >> do you think there should be a travel ban? >> there are two cases. two cases too many. we have a protocol that needed to be tightened, which has been tightened. we have a team of -- >> yes or no. >> should there be a travel ban? >> should there be a travel ban. >> the president should listen to national public health experts. >> i say there should be. >> and i say we should not be rattling our sabres. we should be making sure people understand that this is something we have to take seriously but not politicize. >> by appointing political hacks to head up the ebola crisis in america. >> by working together to make sure that we don't create hysteria and we address legitimate problems. >> both sides have made it a political issue. congresswoman wasserman schultz, representative preibus, thank you for coming in. >> you should do it more often. this is a pretty good acts. next, we bring back our sunday group to get their take on the midterms and the battle forororororor
i appreciate senator roberts shortstop to our country. i appreciate his service in the marines. >> i will say you are a very well-dressed poeopponent. i admire your accumulation of wealth. >> one of the lighter moments in this heated campaign today, kansas senate debate when independent challenger orman and pat roberts were asked to say something nice to each other. we're back with the panel. i want to show the bothered i showed the two-party chairman. the obama approval, key states the republicans are trying to flip. obama approval between 32%, 39%.
incumbent voters voting with the president at least 93% of the time. about the r brit, that has to be a big problem. >> historically it is. that's just one of factors that would tell you things are lining up for the republicans. they could win six, eight seats, even more in the senate. however, democrats are doing everything they can to replicate the turnout operation they used to support barack obama in the 2012 election. it was the best ever built, best ever designed. and if they were able to replicate that in turnout -- >> you heard reince preibus -- >> i heard him on that. maybe he's right. but it took democrats eight years to overtake the republicans who had the best turnout operation back in '04 which contributed mightily to the re-election of george w. bush. whether the republicans can catch up in two years, is a good question.
if they haven't, and if democrats are able to do what they did before, there's a very good chance this election could be at least fought to a draw, which would help the democrats. >> if you're a voter if one of those states and you're one of two-thirds of people, 70% of people who don't like the president and you've got a95% o should you vote to reelect him? >> look, mark begich is in alaska talking about being elected six years instead of two years. democrats have been dealing with this for the last year or so. we have a democrat surging in georgia of all parts of the country, a place that republicans didn't want to invest any money, they're putting millions on the air to defend a seat in georgia. i don't think the politics is lining up perfectly. obviously i think the fact that republicans are in this late date looking at a candidate getting almost 50 in georgia is a surprise. i don't think it is going to be a wave one way or the other. these are hard fought races throughout the country and we have governor's races, florida,
wisconsin, in which republicans are likely to get knocked out. >> we are tight on time in this segment. i am not going to ask a political question. you wanted round two on the issue of ebola. >> now that the congresswoman from florida has raised the issue, the university of minnesota center for infectious disease research on policy has issued a report saying, quote, there is scientific and epidemiological evidence that ebola virus has the potential to be transmitted via infectious aer sol particles near and at a distance from infected patients. >> i just want to say, that's michael oster who have, the fellow we talked about the first segment. we asked dr. fauci about it. he said does it have the potential, but it doesn't do it now. >> again, we're getting used to people declaring scientific debates closed, over and settled, they rarely are. >> back to politics.
juan, what stands out for you about this election at this point two weeks out? >> achoo. no. >> well played. >> i think it goes back to what the brilliant mr. hughes said. i mean, there's no way. everything is set up for the republicans to do very well here if this game is played in red states, that's why you put up those poll numbers. that wouldn't be true for the entire country, in these states, these are red states. >> states that the republicans are trying to flip. >> i'm saying, they should be wiping the table. they're not. there's no way. rather '06, '08, '10, '12. >> we weren't sure there would be a wave election. >> the 1800s, second term presidents do terribly, terribly. >> the point is talking about george will's overstatement of certitude. >> we know there's no way at
this point three weeks out. second thing, i am amazed the republicans have no ajend a don't say what they stand for. third, this election is about women. can you get blacks, hispanics to turn out, it is the women. you go to a place like colorado, it is all about women's rights. >> you have 40 seconds to rebut mr. williams. >> the first of the president by name refers to signature achievement, the affordable care act, the chances are good it is a republican ad, not a democratic ad. in 2010, when the democrats were facing what they thought was a wipe out akin to 1994, the president said don't worry, you've got me. didn't work in 2010. >> let me just say, the affordable care act, not an issue. economy, unemployment, not an issue. what's going on here. >> it is a great year for the democrats. thank you, panel. up next, power player of the
time is a big deal in television news. this show starts on time and it ends on time. but what does that really mean? here is our power player of the week. >> why wouldn't i say i am obsessed with time. i do think about time all the time. >> he is talking about his job at the u.s. naval observatory time service department. >> we provide the official time for department of defense and for gps and via gps it goes to much of the world. >> so it is not an exaggeration to say you are the time keeper. >> we are the time keeper. >> and keeping time, precise time, is important, for the
financial system, for the internet, for the pentagon. the department has more than 100 atomic clocks and there are three different types. one measures the oscillation of cesium atoms. >> how often does a cesium atom os late. >> that's the definition of a second. >> he took us to see another clock called an atomic fountain. >> we use lasers to freeze atoms to about a millionth of a degree above absolute zero, then launch them. >> all of that information which varies by nanoseconds is then fed here. this is the nation's master clock. all those 100 clocks. >> this is the national clock for department of defense. >> next door, the time transfer room sends the time out to the nation and the world. even that phone number you call
to get the time. >> at the time, eastern daylight time, 15 hours, 50 minutes exactly. >> he's headed this time service department for 16 years, starting in 1997 he is now the chief scientist. and he says the job comes with a certain amount of, well, time pressure. >> there have been three times in my tenure when the master clock itself has broken. always when i have been on an airplane. when people leave working for time service, it doesn't take long, maybe a week or two, when they realize that they're not -- >> all this talk about time got me thinking. >> i got 3:15. what have you got. >> i don't wear a watch. >> he explains he doesn't want the measurement of time, especially something as imprecise as a watch, to get confused with time as an objective reality.
it's the pursuit of that absolute truth that drives it. >> beauty. there's a tremendous beauty to it. what's beautiful is an explanation of what's happening, an explanation of what's going on, if beautiful is doing the job right, that's all beautiful. that's the only way to put it. >> he says the atomic fountain clocks are so accurate that taken together, they won't lose or gain a full second in 300 million years. but he says they're working on a new master clock that will be even more accurate. that's it for today. have a great week. see you next fox news sunday. -
starts next. >> are we trying that hard to keep ebola out? and should the government impose a travel band? can republicans take control of the senate or blow it? they are 25 miles from baghdad. is isis capable of taking iraq's capitol. and houston mayor pastor's sermons are fair game. i say game on. ♪ >> good evening, and i am mike